ID help please...

[Wags]

Hi, this fish was sold to me as A. borelli but it looks a little like Inconspicua to me. I could probably get a picture of one of the females if necessary.

 

[Mike Wise]

Well, it certainly isn't borellii. It looks a lot like A. caetei, but the tail is not strongly spotted. My guess is that it is a form of A. sp. Steel-blue. It commonly comes in mislabeled as borellii.

 

[Wags]

Thanks for the insight Mike. I got a picture of a female in brood colors if that helps.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
I think they might be "Steel-blue" as well, good news is they are definitely male and female. The male should colour up to have quite a stunning turquoise shine.

ApistoBob has some details: <http://www.dwarfcichlid.com/Apistogramma_sp_Steel_blue.php>.

cheers Darrel

 

[Mike Wise]

The female looks like a resticulosa-complex species, which is expected for Steel-blue. This is why they were/are thought by many to be a cross between a caetei-complex and resticulosa-complex species.

 

[Lolojil]

I think that it is a different specie that the "Steel Blue".

It seems to be the fish which Römer call A. sp. aff. taeniata few years ago.

 

[Wags]

I've been looking through pictures and my fish don't look like any steel blue i've seen. It could just be a poor color line, but is it possible that it is a pure geisleri or resticulosa?

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
I'm not sure you will be able to get a definitive I.D., I've got no expertise, but the other posters on this thread are very knowledgeable indeed. The problem is that there are a lot of very similar looking Apistogramma species to the all of the ones pictured.

Personally I thought it was probably "Blue-steel", this was based partially upon the shape, finnage, the separate caudal blotch and extensive cheek spotting of the male, but much more on the fact that I know commercially produced "Blue-steel" are commonly sold in a lot of non-specialist LFS, often as A. "borellii". This was how I obtained my original Apistogrammas, a "pair of A. borellii", but actually 2 male "Blue-steel".

Mike Wise, (who really does have the necessary expertise), noted down the criteria you need for in a photo for I.D. purposes in another "Blue-steel" post <http://www.forum.apistogramma.com/showthread.php?t=9087>:

"Ask yourself:
1. Does it show the fish's head/body shape accurately (as perpendicular to the camera as possible; not head on or tail on shots)?

2. Does it show the fish's finnage accurately (raised spines, spread tail)?

3. Does it show the fish's dark markings on the head, body and fins accurately? These are the most important diagnostic features on apistos. These dark markings are best seen on stressed/frightened males and females in a neutral mood. This is why it is helpful (to me) that photos of the female be provided if possible.

4. What was the name that the fish was sold as? Sometimes it hints at what it is; sometimes not, but it doesn't hurt to add this information.

5. How large is the fish in the photo? Juvenile/small specimens are next to impossible to identify down to species level. Size of mature specimens can be very useful.

6. Is the fish domestically bred? Most domestic fish are either accurately identified or at least have a commercial name that can be cross referenced.

7. Is the fish wildcaught? Wildcaught fish usually show diagnostic features better because they haven't been altererd by line breeding. If it is wildcaught, can you find out which country/region that the fish came from? If one can eliminate species from some areas, it helps to narrow down the possible species that it can be. Were there any contaminant (by-catch) fish in the shipment? Sometimes these 'oddballs' can indicate the country of origin of the apisto."

So for example if the fish was wild caught, and came from a known locality, say exported through Belem, Brazil, then A. "Wagenflecken" becomes a distinct possibility, and some of the other possible species can be discounted.

cheers Darrel

 

[Rolo]

I've been looking through pictures and my fish don't look like any steel blue i've seen. It could just be a poor color line, but is it possible that it is a pure geisleri or resticulosa?

Please remove the pictures from your posting!

It is not allowed to use pictures of other people in that way. That's a violation of copyright law.

Anyway, the picture of Jörg Vierkes A. resticulosa shows an A. sp. Wangenfleck! ;-)

regards,
Rolo

 

[Mike Wise]

I am not positive what species this is. I am like Darrel. My first thought was Steel-blue because it comes in so often under the name A. borellii. I would expect Steel-blue to have a more strongly patterned caudal fin on the male than do your fish. It would be helpful to see photos of the male's tail so that I can see the pattern on it. It would be very helpful to see the vertical barring on the body (fright/stress pattern), too, and answers to many of the other questions posted. BTW, [FONT=&quot]A. sp. aff. taeniata in Cichlid Atlas 2 is the same species as A. cf. resticulosa Mamoré (A 16). Wag's fish look like a deeper bodied form of A. taeniata or caetei-complex.
[/FONT]